re: Bettman being American. Not entirely... the fact he didn't know jack shit about the sport before getting the job is more of a rub. You couldn't say that about a single solitary Canadian. Most Americans (including hockey fans) cannot comprehend the passion for the league in Canada. I'll never forget seeing this chart back in 2010. It was estimated that 80% of the country watched that gold medal game. It was the most watched anything in the history of TV in Canada.

Interesting, I generally agree with your point, but I will say as an American fan while I respect the tradition and passion Canada has for the game - it kinda makes sense that Bettman (as an American) got the gig. Like you said he's for the owners and basically works for their best interests, and with most of the teams being in the US it makes sense the owners would want a US guy because (I'm assuming) most of those owners are American or at the very least live in America the majority of the time. Not saying it was a good call on their part, just saying.

On your last part, it's simple economics. Depending on your standard of measure, the Canadian economy is typically between 7%-10% the size of the the US. By that factor, there should be at least 70 American teams to equate to the 7 Canadian teams. Nationality of NHL players is still dominated by Canadians - currently 46%

Yup, you are totally right on the economics of things, like I said before, I just find it to be an interesting situation because the other leagues don't really have to deal with it. Down here (read-America) a lot of hockey conversation revolves around Canadian influence being too rooted in tradition which can prevent the league from moving forward in a variety of ways. That's just simply something the NBA or the NFL or the MLB don't really have to deal with. There's no pointing fingers (valid or not) across borders.

In what ways is Canadian influence is preventing the league from moving forward? Serious question. This decade, we've seen global expansion for games, domestic team expansion (with Seattle still to come), instant replays, the ref-cam, 3-3 overtime, bye-weeks, mic'd referees to announce penalties (Wes McAuley is AWESOME!), wildcard playoff format.... that's all I can think of off the top of my head.

A lot of which seem to mimic the NFL.

Also, did the US coverage of the All-Star Game test the drone/ariel play-by-play camera?

In what ways is Canadian influence is preventing the league from moving forward? Serious question. This decade, we've seen global expansion for games, domestic team expansion (with Seattle still to come), instant replays, the ref-cam, 3-3 overtime, bye-weeks, mic'd referees to announce penalties (Wes McAuley is AWESOME!), wildcard playoff format.... that's all I can think of off the top of my head.

A lot of which seem to mimic the NFL.

Also, did the US coverage of the All-Star Game test the drone/ariel play-by-play camera?

Oh, I don't think it's an issue, I was merely saying it was a point of conversation down here. You've really never heard that sort of thing?

A lot of it has to do with the Canadian mentality of tough guy, grinder hockey, having a league that values the 4th line right wing curtain jerker as much as the super stars. Most folks in the states would like to see a high-speed, high-skill, high-scoring game. So the way the game is being called right now is frustrating to a lot of people. Those people tend to look at Toronto and point the finger that a way (whether right or wrong).

Most folks in the states would like to see a high-speed, high-skill, high-scoring game. So the way the game is being called right now is frustrating to a lot of people. Those people tend to look at Toronto and point the finger that a way (whether right or wrong).

Like I said, I don't see that as a particular issue, but plenty do.

That boggles me. League scoring is up across the board. The holding/slashing calls nowadays are intended to do EXACTLY what you're suggesting - increase speed/scoring. The 90s (read, New Jersey "trap") was the worst time for this. Problem with wanting ONLY a high flying / high scoring game is A) there aren't 18*31 high-skilled hockey players, and the goal is to win, not score as many goals. Just like in Football and Baseball, defence/pitching is what wins championships. In the NBA, 3-pt% .

Most folks in the states would like to see a high-speed, high-skill, high-scoring game. So the way the game is being called right now is frustrating to a lot of people. Those people tend to look at Toronto and point the finger that a way (whether right or wrong).

Like I said, I don't see that as a particular issue, but plenty do.

That boggles me. League scoring is up across the board. The holding/slashing calls nowadays are intended to do EXACTLY what you're suggesting - increase speed/scoring. The 90s (read, New Jersey "trap") was the worst time for this. Problem with wanting ONLY a high flying / high scoring game is A there aren't 18*31 high-skilled hockey players, and the goal is to win, not score as many goals. Just like in Football and Baseball, defence/pitching is what wins championships. In the NBA, 3-pt% .

While I agree with your overall point, I just wanted to point out something about the bolded, which, as a Canadian, you likely already know. The sheer amount of EXTREMELY high skilled players that never made it the NHL is astounding. I have played senior hockey in a league where 70ish% of the players played CHL, NCAA, ECHL, and even a couple that played in the NHL for a short while, and there are so many guys that can control the puck like Malkin and makr scrubs like me look really stupid

If the league was geared toward marketability and putting a better product on the ice, those types of players should absolutely be on an NHL roster rather than guys like Reaves, Martin, etc, and even purely defensive minded players. We all watch the World Juniors and love the open style of hockey, so why isn't the NHL like that? With all those super-skilled players in the lineup there would be more goals (both because they can score and can't defend) and more overall excitement. A league that struggles to gain fans in the US would benefit greatly from such a paradigm shift.

That boggles me. League scoring is up across the board. The holding/slashing calls nowadays are intended to do EXACTLY what you're suggesting - increase speed/scoring. The 90s (read, New Jersey "trap") was the worst time for this. Problem with wanting ONLY a high flying / high scoring game is A) there aren't 18*31 high-skilled hockey players, and the goal is to win, not score as many goals. Just like in Football and Baseball, defence/pitching is what wins championships. In the NBA, 3-pt% .

I'm pretty darn sure on average there are less goals scored per game now than in the 90s. Totally disagree on the skill part... But you highlight a specific problem - if the NHL actually just simply called their rule book, everytime, all the time - the same in October as in June - they would solve a lot of problems right quick.

If the league was geared toward marketability and putting a better product on the ice, those types of players should absolutely be on an NHL roster rather than guys like Reaves, Martin, etc, and even purely defensive minded players. We all watch the World Juniors and love the open style of hockey, so why isn't the NHL like that? With all those super-skilled players in the lineup there would be more goals (both because they can score and can't defend) and more overall excitement. A league that struggles to gain fans in the US would benefit greatly from such a paradigm shift.

Jarlaxle said it better than I could have. And this is kinda what I was pointing to earlier with my statement that many people in the US feel like Canada is holding on to the 4th line grinder role and wanting that role to be as important as the 30 goal scorer. Also like Jarlaxle pointed out this is one of the reasons why the NHL continues to struggle to gain popularity.

I mean look at a simple stat - goals. Now a days if a guy can score 50 goals in a season it's a huge accomplishment. In the 80s guys were scoring literally almost twice as many. I guarantee you the league would explode in popularity in the states if that was the case now. And to make matters worse, the league has actually had those generational talents the last 10-15 years that could pull it off - Ovie, Sid, Geno, Kane, now Connor, etc...

Respectfully, I disagree vehemently. Except in rare circumstances, 18 and 19 year olds - even the Tier 1 players - don't play in the NHL because they can't. They aren't physically or mentally prepared, and older more experienced players (even 3rd and 4th liners) would school them. I'm not talking about the McDavid's and Matthews' of the world, but take Victor Mete for instance - Top 2 defenceman on Team Canada Jr, barely making the roster on the Montreal Canadiens.

These kids are great and HIGHLY entertaining - relatively speaking. They are great when compared against other kids. Put them against the regulars of the NJL, and they'd look silly. Hell, Matthews still makes really bad plays on occasion.

I won't argue that some of the *best* in the world are not in the NHL... but that isn't always the NHL's call. Lots of players want to play in Europe or Russia. And fwiw, it doesn't take a lot of stupendous skill to make the average Joe look bad (no offense intended). I have a buddy who plays in a mens league with Ron McLean; My brother used with Rick Walmsley. As a forward, Walmsley was dancing circles around the average guy... same with McLean.

Higher this year at 2.95 than anytime since '05/'06. The early 90s were in the 3's, but late 90s crashed to the 2.6/2.7 range. Of course, early 80s was the hey-day, when it was close to 4. Back when we had named enforcers and goons.

I think you took my point too literally when I compared the WJC to the NHL. I'm not saying those exact players should be in the NHL right now, but those players 3-5 years down the line when they can compete physically with men, who "can't" play NHL because they don't have a well-rounded game. Drake Batherson might never make the NHL, but he was phenomenal and he showed his offensive ability on the tournament. I'd rather the puck squirted out to him in the slot in game 7 than Reaves.

I think the NHL is (slowly) shifting toward this style of play, it's why the Penguins won back to back cups, and why they don't win this year because they have a pilon taking up space on the forth line (can you tell I'm a Pens fan less than pleased we gave up a perfect 4th line center and Klim Kostin for a player that holds no value on any team, because cheap shots still happen with him on the team ). The biggest issue is coaching, I think. There are coaches for eveey situation on the bench, trying to keep players into their prototypical player box all game. Marek from Sportsnet has an excellent idea, to limit teams to one coach on the bench during games, which would inevitably lead to more mistakes (by players and coach) and more scoring/excitement.

And as for your men's league comment, I'll respectfully disagree there. While I'm not an amazing hockey player, I was the last 1 or 2 cuts on my CIS hockey team, which is better hockey than the CHL. Even so, lots of these guys have the ability to make me look like a beer leaguer. There are 5 guys on our team that also play AAA senior hockey (where many retired NHLers play). The one guy had a tryout a few years back with Minnesota when he was 19, and afterward was offered multiple KHL contracts. Watching him play is sublime, and there's no doubt in my mind if he had been given an opportunity at the NHL level he would have been a good player.

Do you really feel that Bettman is against the players? I don't. I think Bettman has worked pretty hard to get a system that works. I actually feel that Bettman wasn't necessarily acting solely as an agent of the owners, but more as saying, "Everyone, we are not going any further until we come to an agreement."

I don't think the players have it all that bad at all in the NHL.

pg1067, are you in an NHL city, and if so, may I ask which one?

I live roughly halfway between Staples Center and the Pond in Anaheim. Kings fan for nearly 30 years.

As far as Bettman, I don't disagree that the NHL has experienced a lot of growth during his tenure, but he constantly makes bad decisions. The success of the new Vegas franchise notwithstanding, the NHL does NOT need expansion. The league has half a dozen teams that haven't been able to fill their arenas in years. Those teams should be contracted or moved. Winnipeg couldn't support a team, so the team moved to Phoenix, who also doesn't support the team. The league puts a new team in Atlanta, which doesn't support the team, so that team moves to Winnipeg? Huh? The lockouts are the most obvious thing, and they took away a LOT of the league's momentum (two steps forward and three steps back). Losing the entire 2004-05 season irreparably damaged the league.

Logged

"There's a bass solo in a song called Metropolis where I do a bass solo." John Myung

Also, did the US coverage of the All-Star Game test the drone/ariel play-by-play camera?

I don't recall see that too much during the all-star game (maybe a couple replays), but there was some sort of aerial camera used during the Winter Classic, and it was god-awful (an opinion shared by my several hockey fan friends).

I mean look at a simple stat - goals. Now a days if a guy can score 50 goals in a season it's a huge accomplishment. In the 80s guys were scoring literally almost twice as many. I guarantee you the league would explode in popularity in the states if that was the case now.

I don't know. Every so often, I catch a replay of a game from the 80s, and it looks like nobody gave a rip about playing defense. Goalie play has also improved immeasurably. The New Jersey trap of the 90s was awful, but the style of play over the past 10+ years is much more appealing to me than what I've seen of the 80s style. Of course, maybe I'd think differently if I'd been watching the game at the time, but finding hockey on TV in Socal before the Gretzky trade was not an easy thing to do.

Logged

"There's a bass solo in a song called Metropolis where I do a bass solo." John Myung

@ Jarl... yeah, I guess I did take you statement literally. No biggie. But you kinda made your point regarding the guy who never made it to the NHL but is awesome - he got a tryout with Minn, and didn't make the cut. Babcock just made a point to the press before the All-Star break regarding the lull that kids on the Leafs (Marner in particular) are going thru, and I'll paraphrase... he said 'guys who show up in their 1st year of camp regularly scoring 100+ points in Jr quickly realize there are 14 other players better than them here, so they have to figure out how they're gonna make it in the league.' Amazing hockey players aren't necessarily amazing NHL hockey players.

Batherson's a bad example... he'll make it to the NHL one day. But just because any given 18-year old is flashy, can dangle his way to the net and put the biscuit in the basket doesn't mean shit if he's a -14 by the end of his first week in the league. There are roles for all kinds of players - as there is in the NFL and NBA. You can't have 5 Crosby's or Ovechkin's on the ice at all times. Not everyone is going to be a super-talented point-getter. But that doesn't mean they aren't skilled. Skills come in many different sizes and shapes. I know I love Matt Martin on the Leafs. Grinder, willing to hit, muck it up in the corner, get physical. Him laying out a guy in the corner, stealing the puck and giving the team possession has value.

Just my perspective. I love all different kinds of skills on the ice today.

I agree, the drone-cam was terrible.

Ironic the mention of the 80s style of play. That was a way rougher and more violent game than we've got today, with a ton of 'checker' and 'goon' role players. Plus some of the most talented hockey players ever to play the game (21 of the top 30 all-time point getters played thru the 80s) and only a 21 team league - 10 more teams; 180 more players, 820 more games... naturally there will be less goals/game. We'll never see scoring like that again in our lifetime.

Ironic the mention of the 80s style of play. That was a way rougher and more violent game than we've got today, with a ton of 'checker' and 'goon' role players. Plus some of the most talented hockey players ever to play the game (21 of the top 30 all-time point getters played thru the 80s) and only a 21 team league - 10 more teams; 180 more players, 820 more games... naturally there will be less goals/game. We'll never see scoring like that again in our lifetime.

Right, but what I've been saying is that's what is more marketable in the states, like it or not. High octane scoring and more violence.

I don't doubt that at all. The 80s was the best, and I'm grateful I got to see it unfold live. I still contend the '89 Flames/Habs Stanley Cup was the best ever (imo), followed ever so closely by the '87 Oilers/Flyers (I was a big Flyers fan back then). I don't see any future that gets us back to that kind of hockey.

So, changing lanes... a question that's been on my mind for a while, which is the tougher division - Central or Metropolitan? Atlantic is clearly the weakest (Tampa and Boston notwithstanding), and the Pacific is 1/2 killer, 1/2 filler. So, which is the toughest in peoples' opinion?

So, changing lanes... a question that's been on my mind for a while, which is the tougher division - Central or Metropolitan? Atlantic is clearly the weakest (Tampa and Boston notwithstanding), and the Pacific is 1/2 killer, 1/2 filler. So, which is the toughest in peoples' opinion?

Despite my bias I would still say the Central. Top to bottom there isn't one really 'weak' team. There will be a 90 point team sitting watching the playoffs this year....again.

Central (right now) has four teams with 60+ points.....Metropolitan one. Second place pts (57) in Metropolitan right now is tied for 5th/6th in Central. Night after night it's playoff hockey in the central with teams rarely losing two in a row. It's not really close IMO

Central, without a doubt. It'll be well represented with 5 teams in the playoffs.

Couldn't you say the same about the Metro?

That's a foregone conclusion - though, it has as much to do with the weakness of the Atlantic cellar-dwellers. There's a chance that there could be 4 Pacific teams in the playoffs - Calgary, LA and Anaheim are all in the hunt.

I'm torn as to which is the toughest. I gotta go with Metro by a hair. The differences between first and seventh is a four game win-streak / slump. Sure, the Central has higher point totals and every team is in the black when it comes to GF/GA, but the competitiveness of the Metro is what tips them over the edge at this point.

It’s a tough call. I don’t discount what’s been said about the Metropolitan division but i see more of the Central division games and know first hand how tough it is to beat those teams. I see the Central as ‘tougher’ teams to play and that division is just as volitile when it comes to first place to missing the playoffs. It’s only 9 pts from first to second wild card spot with final wild card team having two games in hand on first place.....so theoretically it could be 5 points.

I live roughly halfway between Staples Center and the Pond in Anaheim. Kings fan for nearly 30 years.

As far as Bettman, I don't disagree that the NHL has experienced a lot of growth during his tenure, but he constantly makes bad decisions. The success of the new Vegas franchise notwithstanding, the NHL does NOT need expansion. The league has half a dozen teams that haven't been able to fill their arenas in years. Those teams should be contracted or moved. Winnipeg couldn't support a team, so the team moved to Phoenix, who also doesn't support the team. The league puts a new team in Atlanta, which doesn't support the team, so that team moves to Winnipeg? Huh? The lockouts are the most obvious thing, and they took away a LOT of the league's momentum (two steps forward and three steps back). Losing the entire 2004-05 season irreparably damaged the league.

Cool, thanks.

I'm not defending Bettman. I just don't understand the hate.Honestly, the lockouts don't bother me. The system since the last one seems to be working pretty good. And I'm not one that thinks hard salary cap=evil owners and commisioner.

The expansion is a little nuts. Why go back to Atlanta? I'm one that thinks the more Canadian cities, the better. It shoudn't be up to whoever ponies up the expansion cash. But I guess sometimes you never know. Nashville, of all places, seems to be working out pretty good. I know I'm going back a bit, but San Jose has worked.

So did anyone watch the round table on the NHL Network this weekend with Pang, Weekes, Stevens, and Melrose? I really enjoyed it. Panger is excellent as always, and I love Kevin Weekes. He is one of the best anylists out there. But I could listen to Scott Stevens talk hockey all day long. I love when he's on the brpoadcasts. But I was surprised to see Melrose on the NHL Network. Apparently no longer with ESPN. My thought watching the round table is that Melrose will have to step it up with his preparation. I actually like Melrose, but hockey people are paying attention and I thought he was a bit outclassed on the round table.

So did anyone watch the round table on the NHL Network this weekend with Pang, Weekes, Stevens, and Melrose? I really enjoyed it. Panger is excellent as always, and I love Kevin Weekes. He is one of the best anylists out there. But I could listen to Scott Stevens talk hockey all day long. I love when he's on the brpoadcasts. But I was surprised to see Melrose on the NHL Network. Apparently no longer with ESPN. My thought watching the round table is that Melrose will have to step it up with his preparation. I actually like Melrose, but hockey people are paying attention and I thought he was a bit outclassed on the round table.

But my biggest gripe of All Star weekend was the lack of Kelly Nash.

Melrose has been working with the NHL Network since 2011 and is still with ESPN.

For me, Kathryn Tappen >>>> Kelly Nash. If you're a baseball fan, Kelly Nash shows up quite frequently on the MLB Network's Quick Pitch and Plays of the Week shows, although I much prefer Heidi Watney on Quick Pitch.

Logged

"There's a bass solo in a song called Metropolis where I do a bass solo." John Myung

For us up here, the HNIC round-table crew includes Nick Kypreos and Kelly Hrudey. Those guys have been analysts pretty much out of the gate since they retired. On alternate nights, we've got Doug MacLean.

TSN's panel has Dave Poulin and Jeff O'Neill + 2 long-time TV analysts. O'Neill can be a bit smug and arrogant at times, but otherwise it's a good crew with good chemistry. IIRC, Pang was on TSN a few years back, and yeah, he's good.

So did anyone watch the round table on the NHL Network this weekend with Pang, Weekes, Stevens, and Melrose? I really enjoyed it. Panger is excellent as always, and I love Kevin Weekes. He is one of the best anylists out there. But I could listen to Scott Stevens talk hockey all day long. I love when he's on the brpoadcasts. But I was surprised to see Melrose on the NHL Network. Apparently no longer with ESPN. My thought watching the round table is that Melrose will have to step it up with his preparation. I actually like Melrose, but hockey people are paying attention and I thought he was a bit outclassed on the round table.

But my biggest gripe of All Star weekend was the lack of Kelly Nash.

Melrose has been working with the NHL Network since 2011 and is still with ESPN.

For me, Kathryn Tappen >>>> Kelly Nash. If you're a baseball fan, Kelly Nash shows up quite frequently on the MLB Network's Quick Pitch and Plays of the Week shows, although I much prefer Heidi Watney on Quick Pitch.

I have the NHL Network on every day, and I don't remember Melrose on it at all, until he popped up a few weeks ago. In fact I'm sure I've never seen him.

I also have the MLB Network on everyday during baseball season.

I actually find Heidi Whatney kind of skanky. Remember, we had her here on the local broadcast and she had quite a reputation in the Sox clubhouse.

Kathryn Tappen used to be the studio host for the Bruins games before she moved on to the NHL Network.

For us up here, the HNIC round-table crew includes Nick Kypreos and Kelly Hrudey. Those guys have been analysts pretty much out of the gate since they retired. On alternate nights, we've got Doug MacLean.

At noon each day, the NHL Network shows a Sportsnet talk show that usually has Kypreos and MacLean (who is awesome BTW). It's actually pretty boring, but I'll put it on if I'm home.

I’d like to see Nick Kypreos choke on a steak. His phantom flop onto Grant Fuhr cost the Blues a legit shot at the Cup. Dirty little D Bag.

Edit: I really don’t wish the guy dead. He’s just a cheap player who cost the Blues big time. Maybe if he’d just tear his ACL or develop erectile disfunction I’d call it even

Well, tell us how you really feel! lol

I forgot that was Kyp'r that did that one. Yeah, that was quite an 'accidentally on purpose" flop on Fuhr, and highly unfortunate it blew his knee out. Casey did take them pretty deep into the playoffs though, iirc.

I forgot that was Kyp'r that did that one. Yeah, that was quite an 'accidentally on purpose" flop on Fuhr, and highly unfortunate it blew his knee out. Casey did take them pretty deep into the playoffs though, iirc.

Casey played tremendous for most of the playoffs after that, although Game 2 against the Red Wings was rough. I have never held the Yzerman Game 7 winner against him. That was a one in a million shot that would have beaten just about any goaltender (it happened so fast and you aren't expecting a shot from that far out to hit the far upper corner).

I have never held the Yzerman Game 7 winner against him. That was a one in a million shot that would have beaten just about any goaltender (it happened so fast and you aren't expecting a shot from that far out to hit the far upper corner).

One of the greatest playoff goals ever. This one camera angle from behind the net that shows it ... on a rope like it's a laser beam. Perfect shot.

I have never held the Yzerman Game 7 winner against him. That was a one in a million shot that would have beaten just about any goaltender (it happened so fast and you aren't expecting a shot from that far out to hit the far upper corner).

One of the greatest playoff goals ever. This one camera angle from behind the net that shows it ... on a rope like it's a laser beam. Perfect shot.

I remember falling asleep during that game and somehow waking up about 5 minutes before Yzerman scored that goal. I remember being surprised that it went in, and I remember jumping up and down in my parents' family room trying really hard not to wake up the rest of the house. Given how good the Red Wings were that year, I was surprised and concerned that the Blues took them to the limit. I was not surprised when they ultimately lost to the Avalanche in the conference finals.

I actually find Heidi Whatney kind of skanky. Remember, we had her here on the local broadcast and she had quite a reputation in the Sox clubhouse.

Kathryn Tappen used to be the studio host for the Bruins games before she moved on to the NHL Network.

If I had one of those "lists" of women with whom I could cheat on my spouse with impunity, Heidi would be on it. As far as her having a "reputation," from what I've read, that's pretty much a prerequisite for being a Sox "sideline" reporter (Jenny Dell, Hazel Mae, Jessica Moran, etc.).

Every time I've seen TSN/HNIC coverage (which isn't very often considering where I live), it's been superb. When the Kings made their Cup runs in 2012 and 2014, lots of folks on the Kings message boards were bitching up, down and sideways about the American coverage (mostly it was a bunch of idiots who don't comprehend why the hometown announcers don't call the playoffs on TV) and trying to figure out how to watch the TSN feed. Of course, I really like Doc Emrick and most of the other NBC/NBCSN announcerts, so it wasn't a problem for me.

Logged

"There's a bass solo in a song called Metropolis where I do a bass solo." John Myung